I'm no patent lawyer, so take everything I say with a grain of...

I'm no patent lawyer, so take everything I say with a grain of salt.
With that said, I believe, if Icon developed a system for creating digital stabilization using a different method to the method used and patented by FBR, then it won't be contravening any of FBR patents. I can't see how they could have done this without using lasers, which is the FBR system. Certainly if they adapt the tech to lay blocks using lasers, the probability of patent infringement becomes stronger, in my humble opinion.

If Icon are using FBR's system for creating digital stabilization, then I believe it is only a matter of time before FBR take Icon on for patent infringement. Given that FBR are ramping up commercialisation, they don't have the funds or management focus to take on Icon for patent infrigement, at this point in time, but I believe they will in the future. When this happens, if Icon are found to have infringed on our patent rites, it could lead to not only an injunction but also damages for lost Revenue and foregone profits, from work Icon have caried out themselves.

The point I am making is that I believe under either scenario, FBR has a huge tailwind for growth. Whether it is a monopoly or oligopoly, demand will in my opinion outstrip supply for many many years to come. There are very few monopolies in this world. I can think of maybe only a handful of true monopolies, yet think about how many companies there are that earn significant returns despite not being monopolies.

I think you are missing the forest from the trees. There is always going to be a company out there trying to rip off your work. The real value comes where true innovators continue to push the limits of their technology and continue to improve. This is where real moats come from.

this is just my opinion which could be wrong. Not investment advice. Do your own investment research, etc etc.